Automation Anywhere vs Control-M

Automation anywhere is well suited in most rule-based processes. It can manage high-volume transactions with accuracy and scale up quickly. It is very flexible in terms of integration and implementation. The bots can be scheduled, monitored and performance can be reported on a regular basis. It works well with most enterprise solutions.

Control-M is a reliable and well-developed product with excellent vendor support that updates and expands the software often and offers a cloud-based deployment choice. When there are many Batch processes in IT operations that need to be monitored and controlled to ensure IT services, Control-M is ideally suited for centralized workload automation and task management.

• Now I easily generate the invoices and quotation generation is an easy task now. Previously it was very time consuming as we have to drag the data from the excel sheets.
• I will praise its integration with other software that has facilitated us to make amendments in the data across those platforms.
• Its interface is very easy and user friendly.

• Control-M provides a single, centralized interface for monitoring and managing all batch processes in the organization. Nothing is hidden or left unattended in a timely manner.
• The proper use of the BIM component has allowed the change of paradigm in the operation, adopting a proactive management instead of the typical reactive management in the event of production failures.
• The use of Forecast and production simulations allows you to identify bottlenecks and focus first on managing those failures that have the greatest impact on production SLAs.
• Control-M/Change Manager has arrived to shorten development cycles from requirements gathering to production testing. It has been a utility that monetizes the development of Jobs meshes.
• The GUI is capable of efficiently handling more than 80,000 jobs per day. This is certainly a challenge in designing a good user experience. I don't know if there is a reasonable limit to this. One of my clients runs more than 80,000 Jobs daily and the GUI remains smooth all the time.
• Job-As-Code is a DevOps accelerator that has just begun to be adopted. Its implementation will make workload management even more cost-effective.

• Automation Anywhere doesn't come with easy installation, We need to install Java, IDEs and Databases in an orderly fashion which we are not able to do.
• Automation Anywhere has no workflow design which is not making us to understand the process.
• Automation Anywhere has no fit to size object cloning.

• As with most of the mainframe software products, documentation seems to be the weak link for the products - written by people and for people who already know what they need to do, not for people who are trying to figure how to use the product.
• We are a large JES3 mainframe shop. As with all vendors who still provide software for mainframe systems, software is generally designed and developed for JES2 and is frequently not fully tested in a JES3 environment before being shipped out.

To continue enjoying the benefits of our productivity improvements and efficiency focus.

It is a great product plain and simple. We've had Control-M for 20+ years and the support that BMC Software provides is really second to none. There is always a situation that someone can think of where I have to say, "No we can't do that", however I'm confident that we've been able to meet and most of the time exceed our end user expectations with what the product can offer them.

On more complex use cases, Automation Anywhere requires technical background like knowledge on network protocols and database language on task creation, and even people with technical background might have some trouble in the beginning because of the product particularities on how variable manipulation works, or how to get the object cloning (a more resilient screen manipulation command) to work as intended. The scheduling of tasks on the Control Room and the autologin feature isn't intuitive as they should, so much of this works requires documentation analysis to get it done on the first time.

Control-M's overall usability is very good because it is simple to use. Control-M SelfService is an easy tool to give to some of the users who want to use a web interface. The training curve for most users is very short and most of the functions are very simple to figure out.

We've had issues with a server crashing. The latest issue has the option for high availability which should help with that.

I've never seen a performance issue with Control-M.

Automation Anywhere is a great tool for a low cost, fairly easily scalable, and quickly learned. The company is growing by leaps and bounds and continually pushing the automation boundaries. The problem with fast expansion is that sometimes you can grow more quickly than you can appropriately support your products. While Automation Anywhere has an excellent support structure in place, every company and situation is different, and they often struggle with why problems arise in the system and how to fix them.

Although the product is very stable there have been a few incidents when I needed support. I have worked with technicians from all around the globe because of the rolling support. This gives me the quickest support when I need it most in those early hours of the morning. The technicians I have worked with have been very knowledgeable and if necessary got help when needed.

Perfect training from the online academy the software offers it for free

Nothing in particular

It is a good approach to define a distributed architecture when you have multiple control-m servers.

In terms of costing, Uipath is more cost effective. Uipath doesn't support Unicode based websites but Automation Anywhere can help on this front. The user interface of Uipath is more user-friendly and attractive over Automation Anywhere. AA has a stronger network of resellers as compared to Uipath so you may be getting pushed for it and it's advisable to make decisions based on your own specific requirements.

We last reviewed the market in 2001 (schedulers are long-term commitments!) and Control-M edged (by a very narrow margin) the Tivoli alternative, with Dollar Universe (now part of Automic) back in third place. We also tested the Tidal Software scheduler (now part of Cisco) but I cannot see that listed here. Control-M won out through reliability and cross-platform support. Since we made our choice it has become clear that Control-M has moved ahead of the alternatives.

Highly reliable once you start experiencing the results. It helps you to have a clear cut results with better productivity numbers and financial savings

Control-M doesn't really use that many resources

• Our overall business has saved numerous hours of work where individuals were freed up to perform higher level thinking tasks.
• Following a necessary reduction in workforce that was not driven by RPA, we were able to automate processes that kept the remaining workload from overwhelming the remaining workforce.
• The use of robotics process automation has inspired many workers to come up with different approaches to problems including both automation and analytics.

• I would expect this product to give a positive return on investment. Running jobs in cron for example would require a lot more scripting effort to ensure that the proper notifications are done on failures. With the built in functionality in Control-M the effort would be greatly reduced